Infanticide

[tinselwolverine]

[quote="MI_Thumb":5294jxls]


The issue remains regardless of what the thread "is about".

And the OP opened it to this type of discussion when he mentioned Noot thinks all pro-choicers are babykillers, if you don't approve of the replies in this thread, go make your own thread and set the topic guidelines however you see fit.

If you look up a few posts, you'll see cheeno trying to keep the discussion "on target". It's tough to do in an abortion related thread. I'm just going with the flow.

The OP acts like Newt made a blanket statement, the 2nd post challenges that idea. If you want to argue about the double standard of blanket statements, let's make sure there was actually a blanket statement made in the 1st place.[/quote:5294jxls]

This is the thing, and the thing is this -

Champ, Thumb and Cheeno are are educated and literate lefties who back their opinions with researched facts and outside support, as do Byco, Red and Kawdup from the conservative perspective - although not surprisingly, as is the case in real life, Champ and Cheeno tend to be snooty, elitist and condescending much of the time with those who disagree with them.

Slick, on the other hand, is just a talking points partisan bonehead who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about pretty much 99% of the time.

 

[redandguilty]

Now I get it, your argument is that cognition does not equate life....

We'd better not worry about cognition. We've got no clue how to determine its presence in other beings.

 

[byco42]

The question is the easy to answer. It's the active, willful termination of a human being, whose life begins at conception. People mollify the act with the justification that there is some distinction between cells and a person when there isn't one. That lack of awareness of self somehow means the self is non-existent. But the reality is that fetuses EDIT are every much a person as is the octogenarian.

Now I get it, your argument is that cognition does not equate life...IMHO you're just worried someone is going to send your doddering old ass to the glue factory the next time you have a senior moment.

It was entirely to illustrate life experience rather than what you proposed. So tell me, when do you think your life began, and why?

 

[cheeno]

Now I get it, your argument is that cognition does not equate life...IMHO you're just worried someone is going to send your doddering old ass to the glue factory the next time you have a senior moment.

It was entirely to illustrate life experience rather than what you proposed. So tell me, when do you think your life began, and why?

Really because I proposed it as an insult to you. Sorry I missed the point.

 

[cheeno]

TinselWolverine[/color]]
[quote="Red and Guilty":06quurkj]

If you look up a few posts, you'll see cheeno trying to keep the discussion "on target". It's tough to do in an abortion related thread. I'm just going with the flow.

The OP acts like Newt made a blanket statement, the 2nd post challenges that idea. If you want to argue about the double standard of blanket statements, let's make sure there was actually a blanket statement made in the 1st place.

This is the thing, and the thing is this -

Champ, Thumb and Cheeno are are educated and literate lefties who back their opinions with researched facts and outside support, as do Byco, Red and Kawdup from the conservative perspective - although not surprisingly, as is the case in real life, Champ and Cheeno tend to be snooty, elitist and condescending much of the time with those who disagree with them.

Slick, on the other hand, is just a talking points partisan bonehead who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about pretty much 99% of the time.[/quote:06quurkj]

Wow this is actually a really fair assessment. To be fair though the condescending part is actually an attempt at humor by me.

 

[byco42]

It was entirely to illustrate life experience rather than what you proposed. So tell me, when do you think your life began, and why?

Really because I proposed it as an insult to you. Sorry I missed the point.

As you mature, you hopefully will learn to separate the opinions of people from the people themselves. Your opinions are what they are at this moment, but you, as a person, will outlast them, and they will change many times over the years.

 

[tinselwolverine]

TinselWolverine[/color]]

This is the thing, and the thing is this -

Champ, Thumb and Cheeno are are educated and literate lefties who back their opinions with researched facts and outside support, as do Byco, Red and Kawdup from the conservative perspective - although not surprisingly, as is the case in real life, Champ and Cheeno tend to be snooty, elitist and condescending much of the time with those who disagree with them.

Slick, on the other hand, is just a talking points partisan bonehead who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about pretty much 99% of the time.

Wow this is actually a really fair assessment. To be fair though the condescending part is actually an attempt at humor by me.

Sure, it is with Champ too much of the time. And I was even being a little tongue in cheek myself.

 

[redandguilty]

I dug a little. I can't find what Newt said that might have to do with the blanket statement stuff. The quote I found is this: "

 

[redandguilty]

There's more to the story than that:
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/08/obama-and-infanticide/

The larger point is that defending abortion is a virtually impossible assignment, as demonstrated by Obama's own actions illustrated in the link.

I think this link is pretty good. If you suspect that it is biased towards the conservative side, I will point out that sites that want to paint Obama as extreme usually point out that Obama was the only person to speak against the 1st version of the bill. This link doesn't mention that.

 

[tinselwolverine]

[quote="TinselWolverine":eyyrt7i9]"Nothing in this Section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being born alive as defined in this Section."

Ha, ha.

I don't know why, but something about the wording here stikes me as being a little bit funny.

Damn near impossible to write this stuff without using words that impart more meaning than intended. I just want to know if a fetus is a corporation.[/quote:eyyrt7i9]

This was really funny Red.

Tough to come up with anything to inspire a chuckle like the language of abortion law.

 

[Michchamp]

Oh, come on. how often do fetuses survive abortions, and is this not simply an attempt by abortion opponents of forcing their religious dogma on an entire population due to a handful of extreme cases?

to me, this looks like an absurd attempt to focus on a 0.00001% of a chance event, in order to mislead and skew policy decisions. And even if they do, we should keep a mangled fetus on life support indefinitely because someone interpreted a 3,000 year old book to say we should? this is absolutely INSANE.

besides, look at the Iraq War. Conservatives are all up in arms about this, but when you talk about slaughtering actual living and breathing human beings in misdirected airstrikes... they cheerfully respond "want to make an omelet? gotta break a few eggs!" so I guess the sanctity of human life is kind of a relative term to begin with, no? or does it only apply to the fetuses of Christian women in the United States? (but not anybody else, because they support the death penalty)

 

[lions2011]

lol...partisan bonehead...ok.

the buffoon ( Noot ) was playing for the conservative base , as was agreed by the media pundits covering the debate he could have chose his words better then he did....you don't throw out words like "extremist" and "infanticide" he could have went around the issue with more tact but hey the guys a slimebag down and probably out of this race so he throws out the fireball quotes.

it's all good....everyone knows Obamas a muslim , who wasn't born in the USA who wants to inact Sharia Law , kill babies and old people with his death panels.

 

[tinselwolverine]

lol...partisan bonehead...ok.

the buffoon ( Noot ) was playing for the conservative base , as was agreed by the media pundits covering the debate he could have chose his words better then he did....you don't throw out words like "extremist" and "infanticide" he could have went around the issue with more tact but hey the guys a slimebag down and probably out of this race so he throws out the fireball quotes.

it's all good....everyone knows Obamas a muslim , who wasn't born in the USA who wants to inact Sharia Law , kill babies and old people with his death panels.

Yeah, like this sort of crap, this is what I'm talking about.

Glad you got an LOL out of it.

Kinda surprised you read it, I didn't see any posts after the OP so I kinda thought you had dropped out of the thread as soon as people started posting a bunch of words that you didn't know what they meant.

Edit:

Actually, what you wrote about Gingrich isn't crap, yes, he certainly used and uses hyperbolic and incindiery rhetoric, like a lot of politicians, I will give you that.

 

[lions2011]

TinselWolverine[/color]]

lol...partisan bonehead...ok.

the buffoon ( Noot ) was playing for the conservative base , as was agreed by the media pundits covering the debate he could have chose his words better then he did....you don't throw out words like "extremist" and "infanticide" he could have went around the issue with more tact but hey the guys a slimebag down and probably out of this race so he throws out the fireball quotes.

it's all good....everyone knows Obamas a muslim , who wasn't born in the USA who wants to inact Sharia Law , kill babies and old people with his death panels.

Yeah, like this sort of crap, this is what I'm talking about.

Glad you got an LOL out of it.

Kinda surprised you read it, I didn't see any posts after the OP so I kinda thought you had dropped out of the thread as soon as people started posting a bunch of words that you didn't know what they meant.

he said it....and it was a direct statement he aimed at the POTUS , even republican pundits like Costellanos and Fleischer said he used inflamatory rhetoric to try and make his point.

but ya...Obamas a baby killer.

 

[redandguilty]

Oh, come on. how often do fetuses survive abortions, and is this not simply an attempt by abortion opponents of forcing their religious dogma on an entire population due to a handful of extreme cases?

to me, this looks like an absurd attempt to focus on a 0.00001% of a chance event, in order to mislead and skew policy decisions. And even if they do, we should keep a mangled fetus on life support indefinitely because someone interpreted a 3,000 year old book to say we should? this is absolutely INSANE.

besides, look at the Iraq War. Conservatives are all up in arms about this, but when you talk about slaughtering actual living and breathing human beings in misdirected airstrikes... they cheerfully respond "want to make an omelet? gotta break a few eggs!" so I guess the sanctity of human life is kind of a relative term to begin with, no? or does it only apply to the fetuses of Christian women in the United States? (but not anybody else, because they support the death penalty)

One survivor is enough to prove to me that we're not drawing the line in the sand in the right place. If there is a line, if there was some point before which it doesn't really count as killing someone, the fact that there are any survivors at all means we've crossed it. And we're not just talking about surviving for a couple hours, some people survive their abortions and go on to live...I won't say normal lives because the abortions leave life-altering damage, but normal length lives.

Also, I'm against the wars (and capital punishment)...so I can't really talk to the rest of your post.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Cool, Slick, read my edit, in my post above, I withdrew a little and gave you some credit.

But you do make your points your own self with a lot of rhetoric and not a whole lot of logical argumentation.

But you're also not running for POTUS.

Peace out.

 

[Michchamp]

I'm not really a "lefty" in the partisan sense.

was hoping the ideological left, i.e. not the Democratic Party, would run a primary challenge against Obama, given that his foreign policy record is identical to the Bush Admin's so far, constitutional issues, and the lack of any serious reform on Wall Street or in the business world.

But, you can't always get what you want, so I guess... if you give me the choice between a center-right sell-out like Obama, and a extreme right sellout that might skew things even further in that direction... I'd have to go with Obama. But I wouldn't be happy about it.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I'm not really a "lefty" in the partisan sense.

was hoping the ideological left, i.e. not the Democratic Party, would run a primary challenge against Obama, given that his foreign policy record is identical to the Bush Admin's so far, constitutional issues, and the lack of any serious reform on Wall Street or in the business world.

But, you can't always get what you want, so I guess... if you give me the choice between a center-right sell-out like Obama, and a extreme right sellout that might skew things even further in that direction... I'd have to go with Obama. But I wouldn't be happy about it.

Yes, I know you're substantially more progressive than the center of the Democratic Party, and I would doubt you're a registered Democrat.

 

[lions2011]

it's all good....they can spew anything they want in a Republican Primary...I get they're playing to their base.

always fun to post the quotes coming out of the clown car....Noot say's he is a baby killer , Santorum say's he's gonna off old people , Mitt flips and flops and really doesn't say anything and poor Ron Paul is just a forgotten man up there usually.

 

[Michchamp]

TinselWolverine[/color]]

I'm not really a "lefty" in the partisan sense.

was hoping the ideological left, i.e. not the Democratic Party, would run a primary challenge against Obama, given that his foreign policy record is identical to the Bush Admin's so far, constitutional issues, and the lack of any serious reform on Wall Street or in the business world.

But, you can't always get what you want, so I guess... if you give me the choice between a center-right sell-out like Obama, and a extreme right sellout that might skew things even further in that direction... I'd have to go with Obama. But I wouldn't be happy about it.

Yes, I know you're substantially more progressive than the center of the Democratic Party, and I would doubt you're a registered Democrat.

You would be correct.

I am a registered Great Guy, however.